5 comments about A Most Wanted Man: A Novel.

1. Beautifully written ... until the Cowboy rides in. Suddenly, on the last couple of pages, the big bad mean nasty rambunctious zealous Americans show up and destroy everything good in the world. HOGWASH! After a novel filled with reminders of the brutality of the Russians in Chechnya, the Germans in Warsaw, the Arabs with their brothers and lovers, and the assorted perversions of European and Mid Eastern culture, a group of American spies appear from outside the plot and overturn the namby pamby actions of half hearted Germans spying on their own country. The most wanted man is a young victim of misinformation and distortions done by non-Americans. The Swiss and Germans have no grace in their laws. The really bad guy in the plot is a sponsor of terrorists. But Le Carre', for purely liberal establishment reasons, enters a couple of spies on horseback as the last act. With what many would like to criticize as typical American cursing and judgementalism and bravado (which in truth is a charicature and misrepresentation of Americans) the really bad guy is swept to justice in the Mid East, and the Chechen is returned to Chechnya by order of Interpol. Le Carre' ends a relatively decent plot, with great characters, by tossing in two pages of claptrap that destroy the novel. DON'T BOTHER READING IT; but if you must, buy it used or check it out of a library.



2. Beautifully written ... until the Cowboy rides in. Suddenly, on the last couple of pages, the big bad mean nasty rambunctious zealous Americans show up and destroy everything good in the world. HOGWASH! After a novel filled with reminders of the brutality of the Russians in Chechnya, the Germans in Warsaw, the Arabs with their brothers and lovers, and the assorted perversions of European and Mid Eastern culture, a group of American spies appear from outside the plot and overturn the namby pamby actions of half hearted Germans spying on their own country. The most wanted man is a young victim of misinformation and distortions done by non-Americans. The Swiss and Germans have no grace in their laws. The really bad guy in the plot is a sponsor of terrorists. But Le Carre', for purely liberal establishment reasons, enters a couple of spies on horseback as the last act. With what many would like to criticize as typical American cursing and judgementalism and bravado (which in truth is a charicature and misrepresentation of Americans) the really bad guy is swept to justice in the Mid East, and the Chechen is returned to Chechnya by order of Interpol. Le Carre' ends a relatively decent plot, with great characters, by tossing in two pages of claptrap that destroy the novel. DON'T BOTHER READING IT; but if you must, buy it used or check it out of a library.



3. I like John le Carré. He is an outstanding stylist who writes with wit and flair. He is also accomplished at writing about "wheels within wheels" intrigues. This one addresses some very topical issues - terrorism and its financing, and the people who watch the terrorists and how far they are prepared to go in bending and even breaking the rules. If you like BANG!-WHAM!-style thrillers, le Carré is most definitely not for you. (The only BANG!-WHAM! comes in the last couple of pages, and, as other reviewers have noted, is decidedly odd).
   
   However, although I enjoyed the style and the characters, I found this one dragged a bit and frequently felt flat, such that, unlike other le Carrés, which I couldn't wait to pick up again, it took me a while to get through it. I think this was partially because I found some aspects of the plot far-fetched and credulity-straining (which might be the result of ignorance on my part, as my knowledge of international banking approximates closely to zero). I just couldn't buy into Tommy Brue and his bank at all.



4. Surgical use of language. LeCarre makes characters visual to the reader. Expect the unexpected.



5. Did you ever watch those people who make amazingly intricate woven rugs, and you wonder how it's done and how do all those little patterns get in there?! Starting A Most Wanted Man this reminded me of seeing those beautiful rugs being made. Characters are complex, and there are quite a few to keep track of; the story is engrossing with several layers of intrigue; and then I kept wondering what else can be stuffed into one book (or how many more patterns can they jam into this rug before you get sick and dizzy looking at it?) I was totally hooked until about a third the way thru, then I had to flip back to see which lady this one was and how she fit in again. Then I set it aside. Then I decided to totally start over again, maybe I was just being lazy the first time around... I got 2/3 way thru before life had to be tended to again. I knew as soon as I set it down I would never go back--it was just too much to keep track of for me. I really really wanted to get all the way thru the book, but I need a total week of no life/work, a notepad to jot down all the angles being worked, a white board to map out all these people and where they fit in... Just can't dedicate that much effort to this book.

5 comments about Hunting the Jackal: A Special Forces and CIA Soldier's Fifty Years on the Frontlines of the War Against Terrorism.

1. I overheard someone once mention that Hunting the Jackal was a great memoir/bio of a Special Forces soldier. I perused the back cover and it seemed interesting. I mean who wouldn't want to read about a career soldier who joined Special Forces when it was in its infancy, became decorated in special forces throughout Vietnam War - 8 purple hearts and 1 silver star - and then retired only to become an undercover operative for the CIA? I grabbed it eagerly.
   
   I was not disappointed as we see Waugh's exploits right from the get go. His harrowing experience, almost fatal, in the jungles of Vietnam, when he was thought dead because of the numerous gunshot wounds and the "colony of leeches" as he put it was how the whole memoir started. Waugh wrote about his many insertions behind enemy lines either training the indigenous or rescuing fellow soldiers. We are treated to roughly three of his CIA missions - Libya, Usama bin Laden, Carlos the Jackal - showing the clandestine ways in which he was assigned to bring in information in order to asses where to attack, who to attack or to obtain the whereabouts of a specific terrorist.
   
   I felt Waugh's account was very accessible to the reader and flowed easily enough. The writing wasn't too complicated, but that is to be expected. I wish Waugh would have wrote more about his missions, both as a CIA operative and a Special Forces soldier, but many of them he simply stated he couldn't talk about. All in all I enjoyed Waugh's memoir and came away with a better appreciation for SOG and the men of the CIA, beginning to understand some of what they did and still do. I would recommend this memoir to anyone interested, although the action and missions slowed considerably towards the latter half of the book.
   
   4.5 stars.



2. Don't by from this site. Have been waiting for over a month for delivery. When you track the order YOU CAN'T EVEN SEND AN E-MAIL. THE SERVICE IS SOOOO BAD. TOTALLY DISGUSTED



3. I'm a Vietnam veteran (Inf. 1Lt.), so I was interested in his experiences, both in combat and after. I was very disappointed. Much of what he writes is bs and he is so full of himself (he's a little guy with that "Napolean Complex"), that I actually threw the book in the trash after I'd finished. First time I'd ever done that with a book, as I usually pass them along when I'm finished. Not a good review, but that's my opinion.



4. Let me just say that this book is a great read, tons of fun and is very hard to put down. If you're into clandestine warfare and military history there aren't too many books that can top this. I do have two minor problems though, which is why I gave it only 4 out of 5 stars. The first is Billy Waugh, as a writer, has an annoying tendancy sometimes to repeat himself. You'll be reading a paragraph and a little while later he'll say essentially the same thing a second time in a slightly differnt manner. The second is this book is less than 350 pages long. That, in itself, may not be a big deal except this man is talking about his 50 years of service to his country. Some of the chapters are, themselves, worthy of their own book...especially his exploits in Vietnam. The section on going after Carlos (a.k.a. The Jackal) is only 3 chapters long, and there are 13 chapters in the book. In all honesty I'd say there's enough material in here for AT LEAST 3 books. After (less than) 350 pages you're left wanting more. What I'd love to see Billy Waugh do is go back and expand on those chapters. Other than that, it's definitely worth the price. All I can say about Billy Waugh as a soldier and a person is, I'm glad he's on our side!



5. Gripping. Allows one to appreciate what our brethren are doing out there while we walk and breath freely.

5 comments about America's Secret War: Inside the Hidden Worldwide Struggle Between America and Its Enemies.

1. After reading the first few chapters of this book, I was forced to change my mind about a number of things. Just one of them was the old question: "Did the United States finance Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan?" For years, I gave the "Richard Miniter Answer": "No, the US only gave money to the Afghan nationals, not to the foreign Arab warriors." After reading Friedman, I tend to think that: Yes, this answer is "correct," but only if you fall for the window dressing. Saudi Arabia financed the Arab mujahideen, yes. But it did so while hand-in-glove with the USA: the two countries were allied in trying (successfully) to create a quagmire for the USSR. It began with the Peanut Farmer, and was intensified under Reagan. And it worked!
   
   The problem was that, typically enough, once the USSR collapsed, we "lost interest" in our former allies and simply abandoned them in Afghanistan. Of course, there may have been some not-so-subtle prodding from Arab regimes (such as Egypt, S.A., and Morocco) to do just that.
   
   Also VERY interesting: 9/11 was not really "all about America." The target was the Arab states just mentioned. Al Qaeda was attempting to provoke the United States into a massive attack on the Arab world as a whole, leading to a pan-Arab Islamic revolution in which the U.S. would simply have been a patsy.
   
   It didn't work. And understanding the strategy of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, Bill Clinton suddenly seems a lot less "lackadaisical." Like all American presidents, he was stuck with a dilemma. If we don't do ANYTHING, Americans will hate us. If we attack the Arabs, we've just been played for suckers. Clinton chose an "in-between" strategy of "ineffective response."
   
   This book is a cram course in current geopolitics, and it is excellent. I would feel a lot more comfortable if the author were our National Security Advisor, or Secretary of State.
   
   The usual ending: "everyone should read this book." But with a special note: "especially the 'Truthers'." This book lays it all out in open view, and shows exactly how the 9/11 hijackers came mostly from Saudi Arabia, but did not represent the WILL of the Saudi Arabian government.
   No: they were trying to overthrow the Saudi Arabian government.
   
   As a result, one comes to view the attempted charitable gift of $10 million from a Saudi royal to NYC in a very different light. Mayor Rudy was "right" to follow his guts and refuse the gift, but, like almost everyone else, he did not understand what had just happened. The Saudi royal quite likely did, and so one of the strangest moments of modern history suddenly becomes a whole lot clearer.
   
   By the way, this book only takes the story to 2004, where the author quite rightly calls the war undecided, although looking bad for Al Qaeda. If you want the rest of the story, you'll need to look at a book like "The Gamble."
   
   One of the best books I have ever read!



2. One of the realizations I had after reading this book is how little of the world's events are reported on the news. Most news agencies do not have the sophistication or the means to provide a precise and a detailed coverage of many of the important world events. If you want to know the illuminating details on Al Queda, Iraq, and the middle east politics, then this book will fit your needs.
   
   The author has a PhD in Political Science from Cornell University. He also has a military and military intelligence background with many years of military strategy experience under his belt. His combination of geopolitical and military expertise provides insights that few others can and he shares many of his knowledgeable and valuable insights in this book.
   
   This book is mostly about 9\11 and the subsequent events, including the invasion of Iraq.
   
   The author successfully put us in the minds of Al Queda. You will have a far greater understanding of Al Queda's motives, abilities, and reasons behind the 9\11 attack. Don't assume Al Queda is a mindless and barbaric terrorist organization. They are far more sophisticated than that.
   
   The author also writes with detailed understanding about Saudi Arabia. He asserts that the US Iraq invasion was about Saud Arabia and its refusal to cooperate with America against Al Queda, and namely, its refusal to cut off Al Queda's funding.
   
   The author refuses, however, to fully address the obvious deficiencies in the US government. For example, it is obvious that the US intelligence and President Bush were negligent, if not derelict, in their duties to protect America from events such as 9\11, which will not go down as a shining moment in America's intelligence community nor the Bush presidency. The US intelligence knew something was going on, and even had someone warn about an impending attack and gave those reports to President Bush, who famously ignored those reports and did nothing.
   
   What is the author's explanation? He says the US intelligence community is great at gathering facts, but is very poor in analyzing those facts and coming to a meaningful conclusion. I thought that was a rather poor excuse for their handling of 9\11. He does, however, strongly imply that the US intelligence community needs a lot of improvement. Six months after 9\11, we had no better intelligence on Al Queda than we did on 9\10.
   
   How about the Bush handling of Iraq? There is hardly any criticism of Bush and his adminitration's incompetence on Iraq and foreign policy. To be fair, Iraq was not quite the disaster when this book was written (2005) than it is now. Rather, the author seems to blame our failures in Iraq on Saudi Arabia's intransigence, and he gives much credit to Al Queda's cleverness and sophistication.



3. This is an engrossing and well-thought out book that will expand the context of all but the most obsessed consumers of Foreign Affairs writing, regardless of political persuasion. Most opinion and analysis of the Middle East today takes place along the lines of the pre-digested CNN "sound bite," creating an extraordinarly limited yet equally self-confident statement of what is "in fact" happening. Thus it is not only refreshing, but highly useful to have at hand the kind of thoughtful, in depth analysis provided by Mr. Friedman, to whom I am personally grateful for having expanded my own understanding of United States foreign affairs.



4. My previous review of this book was not apparently accepted by Amazon so perhaps this will be.
   
   I'm a member of Dr. Friedman's Stratfor, and I find it an excellent source of information and analyses. So this book comes as a considerable let down.
   
   Essentially it reads like Bush Administration propaganda about 9/11 and beyond, but, as Dr. Friedman points out, propaganda made more readable by good editorial advice.
   
   He ignores so much evidence about 9/11 being an 'own goal', and all that has been written about Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001/2003.
   
   It is as if he has put the considerable reputation of Stratfor as a reliable organisation for information and analysis into the service of this propaganda to make it more 'believable'.
   
   I won't go into detail; there is enough of that in some of the previous 71 reviews of this book. I will say just this; while I'm happy to stay with Stratfor for their quality of their services, this book will go either to a charity shop-or in the bin.



5. Like many Americans, I pay close attention to news, both print and broadcast, and thought I was pretty aware, and I was as far as the media and our government fed me information. Actually, my eyes were wide shut. George Friedman opens up a whole new manner of understanding geopolitics with his book "America's Secret War". It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but nothing could be further from the truth. This book explains the necessities that our competitors on the world stage (Russia, China, Brazil, etc.) must work from. He also explains our own needs. Anyone who has an interest in world politics (especially those in D.C.) needs to read this book.

5 comments about First In: An Insider's Account of How the CIA Spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan.

1. excellent book by a true patriot. Got me started on reading other books about the region and the middle east history of conflicts in general. Very interesting, we need more men like Gary 1 in this world...and expecially in the USA. Buy this book, you will enjoy it's story.



2. Part travelogue, part adventure story, sprinkled with dry wit keep this tale moving toward the inevitable conclusion. Mr. Gary Schroen, nearly retired CIA officer, is asked to lead the first team into Afghanistan after 9/11 to setup the initial support of the Northern Alliance in preparation for defeating the Taliban. The irony of this post cold-war fight by proxy is an intriguing twist to the story. Mr. Schroen draws you into the story with his ability to convey the story with details that provide color and the feel of being there. The majority of the book is written in first-person form and in a few chapters Mr. Schroen switches to third-person which affects the flow of the story a bit and is a little distracting. But despite that minor distraction, it flows well and conveys exactly what the reader is looking for with enough detail to please the military historian and enough color to please the traveler and adventurer. Very well done and an enjoyable read. For the military historian who enjoys this work I would also like to recommend, Not a Good Day to Die: The Untold Story of Operation Anaconda. For additional historical context, also see Charlie Wilson's War: The Extraordinary Story of How the Wildest Man in Congress and a Rogue CIA Agent Changed the History of Our Times



3. I wish to extend my gratitude to Mr. Schroen for his heroic efforts on behalf of the American People. He is an excellent example of how far an American citizen will go to secure the safety of our nation.
   
   Like Gary Berntsen's book, Jawbreaker, Gary Schroen's book, First In, is an excellent reference for anyone interested in understanding conditions in Afghanistan, the many decades devoted to getting them to what they are today and America's efforts since 1978 that have left us with the current Afghan situation. In my view, Schroen's most valuable contributions are his chapter on History, and his Afterword that summarizes today's condition.
   
   Sadly, In his History chapter, Schroen leaps from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979, to conditions of Soviet defeat in 1988. One is left without any references to the bloody years in between, when the Afghan defenders suffered tremendous losses and would ultimately have been defeated without the efforts of U. S. Congressman, Charlie Wilson. Indeed, Charlie Wilson's name and influence do not appear anywhere in Schroen's History chapter ... or anyplace else.
   
   While Schroen makes relevant conclusions regarding the failure of the CIA's primary mission in Afghanistan after 9/11/2001, and places much of the blame on a change of America's focus on creating a war in Iraq, I feel he treads too lightly on this topic. Schroen's book carries a 2005 copyright, which means he had plenty of time to develop stronger words of condemnation of the Bush policy of self-serving, Iraq intervention and allowing that misadventure to cloud our focus on just where our primary enemies are.
   
   Lastly, while Schroen's book benefits from slightly better editing and proofreading that Berntsen's book, it remains too rich in dialog for a historical treatise.



4. For those that thought our invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 was the first recent history we had with them since the Soviet-Afghan War, this book will set you straight. There are some lone soldiers operating on the periphery, carrying out U.S. foreign policy with respect and precision, and this is an account of something we did right. Great story, great for posterity.



5. GOOD READ. SHOWS YOU WHAT HAPPENS WHEN
   OUR GOVERNMENT IS ASLEEP AND AMERICANS
   TRUST THE GOVERNMENT EXPLICITLY TO PROTECT
   US. OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE! IT WILL TAKE
   ALL OF US TO THWART ANOTHER 9/11.

5 comments about God's War on Terror: Islam, Prophecy and the Bible.

1. Walid's revelation of those things we in the western world are ignorant of, is tremendous. For many years I have read several books that reveal the Muslim Religion as the evil it is. This book is so much more in Shobat's methodology. I was quite impressed with the way he documented the areas of the Middle East that were involved in the "end times" scenario. I have purchased a total of three of the books and have given them to others. Thanks to the Lord Jehovah for men like Walid.



2. I am about halfway through the the book and it is indeed very eye opening. Mr. Shoebat holds no bar against his old faith of Islam and is very descriptive about the religions theology and the views it has held over the centuries. It makes some very strong indications of where the Bible points out that the Anti-Christ will be a Muslim and contrasts it to the Biblical text versus the Koran. Very startling information. The book is very hard to put down and I would suggest one read it very slow with an open mind. He points out in the book the nonsense of a "Revived Roman Empire" being the unholy warrior against Israel, and gives much insight and details, through a Muslims eyes on how they perceive the coming of their Mahdi. I would like to make a suggestion to the publisher though. If there could be an index to easily look up content and a glossary for the many Islamic terms Mr. Shoebat writes about in his book. Also instead of referencing a verse of scripture from the Bible and the Koran, I think the whole added scripture verse would benefit the reader and make Mr. Shoebats claims even more clear. But having a Bible handy while reading the book does help. I will give a full report on the book when I am done.



3. On the title page of their book, it states, the following: "A fresh understanding of Biblical prophecy from an Eastern perspective as viewed by an ex-Muslim terrorist."
   After reading this book, it is evident the authors obviously believe Western theologians have not given Muslims, and Islam, their proper role in Bible prophecy. Therefore, to correct over two thousand years of erroneous Western theology, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson use their Islamic hermeneutics to "unlock" all the end-time prophecies to show their readers how future events will actually unfold. Or, so these authors seem to allege!
   Unfortunately, because all aspects of this new book cannot be reviewed and posted on Amazon.com, only a few points will be made to show this book is little more than rank heresy.
   In Chapter 38, "Ezekiel 38 Is Armageddon," the authors attempt to show Gog is the Antichrist and write, as follows: "The next argument lies in the fact that the enemy armies are eaten by wildlife in both battles. The specific descriptions concerning the destruction of Gog and his armies and the defeat of the Antichrist mirror one another almost perfectly. Consider the striking similarities between the following two invitations given to the birds of the air and the animals to feast on the flesh of the fallen soldiers" (pg. 271).
   The two invitations Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson are referring to are found in Ezekiel 39:17-20 and Revelation 19:17. Throughout their book, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson give lip service to taking verses out of context, while they only actually follow their rules when it seems to suit their purposes. Someone should ask, "Why do Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson cite some four verses from Ezekiel, but only one verse from Revelation, to compare the "striking similarities" between the two invitations for the birds and animals to feast on the flesh of the dead soldiers?" The answer is obvious. If more verses from Revelation 19 were compared to Ezekiel 39:17-20, the contexts would clearly show the feasts aren't the same, and neither are the battles.
   Nevertheless, just because the fallen enemies in the Gog battle, and in the battle with Antichrist, are eaten by wildlife that does not make the two feasts one and the same feast. In like manner, some "striking similarities" between the battle against Gog and the battle against Antichrist do not make them the same battle. Similarities do not make identities!
   Yes, beasts and birds feast on the dead soldiers after the battle in Ezekiel 38-39, and after the one in Revelation 19. This is not unusual, however, as birds of prey and beasts of prey almost always show up where there is death. But the similarities end there. And these similarities do not necessarily imply the battles are identical.
   Also, the verses in Revelation 19:11-18 begin to unfold the first two of eight scenes of the seventh bowl judgment: (1) the return of the Messiah, the King of Kings (19:11-16); (2) invitation to birds of prey (19:17-18); (3) defeat of the beast, or the Antichrist (19:19-21); (4) the binding of Satan (20:1-3); (5) the Millennium and defeat of Satan (20:4-10); (6) the Great White Throne (20:11); (7) judgment of those whose names are not found in the Book of Life (20:12-15); (8) the new heaven and new earth (21:1-8).
   What follows, are some of the reasons Ezekiel 38-39 is not the same battle that occurs at Armageddon:
   (1) Ezekiel describes only a limited number of invaders from specific countries that attempt to enter Israel (Ezekiel 38:2-6). But Armageddon deals with ALL nations that gather against Jerusalem (Zechariah 12:3; Zechariah 14:2).
   (2) In Ezekiel 38-39, the soldiers from the North will attempt to invade when the Israelis are living at rest and securely (Ezekiel 38:8, 11, 14), but they never enter the modern country of Israel. On the other hand, during Armageddon, Jerusalem will be captured, houses plundered, women ravished, and half the city will be exiled (Zechariah 14:2).
   (3) Ezekiel 38-39 does NOT describe a battle between the Israelis and the invaders from the North. To the contrary, the battle is exclusively between Gog, along with his allies, and God (Ezekiel 38:15-23, 39:1-4). The Israelis never fire a shot! In addition, God slaughters the invaders by using natural events, such as an earthquake, landslides, pestilence, torrential rain, hailstones, fire, and brimstone (Ezekiel 38:20, 22). Moreover, God causes the invaders to kill each other in a state of massive confusion (Ezekiel 38:21). But during Armageddon, the enemy soldiers attack the Israelis by ravishing women and capturing Jerusalem. They are also hit by an earthquake and huge hailstones, are struck with madness, and a plague rotting their flesh, tongue, and eyes. Finally, they are slain by the Messiah and His armies (Zechariah 12:4; Zechariah 14:3, 12-15; Revelation 16:18-21; Revelation 19:11-15).
   (4) Ezekiel says after the invaders from the North are killed, the Israelis spend seven months to bury the dead and seven years to burn the weapons (Ezekiel 39:9, 12, 14). After the Messiah returns at the end of the seven-year Tribulation, however, there are only seventy-five days before the beginning of the Millennium (Daniel 12:11-12). But during this time, John doesn't mention the Israelis burn any weapons, or bury the dead. Furthermore, if Ezekiel 38-39 happens at Armageddon, there is not enough time to bury the dead and burn the weapons before the Millennium begins. And, as will be explained below, burning the weapons and burying the dead cannot take place in the Millennium.
   (5) In the Ezekiel 38-39 battle, Ezekiel does not mention the heavens opening, Christ descending on a white horse, and His armies following Him on white horses to smite the nations.
   The above five differences between the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39, and the one that takes place at Armageddon (Zechariah 14:2-3, Revelation 19:11-15), are quite stark and not minor. Therefore, the two battles are not identical, and occur at different times. And this means the birds and beasts described in Ezekiel and Revelation feed on completely different fallen soldiers. Or, said another way, the "striking similarities" between the two invitations described in Ezekiel 39:17- 20 and Revelation 19:17 are very "un-striking."
   In spite of the fact that Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson have erroneously equated the beasts in Ezekiel 39:17-20 and Revelation 19:17, they continue by writing such things, as, "experts who claim that the Gog and Magog battle is separate from Armageddon, base their theory on the fact that Gog and Magog are destroyed miraculously by God through hail and pestilence while the Antichrist is killed by the sword" (pg. 271). Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson agree that armies are destroyed by both hail, fire, and by the sword. Yet, they add, "in both the Gog and Magog battle as well as Armageddon there is the mention of the destroying sword that God will bring against the invading armies" (pg. 271).
   One has to ask, "What Bible do Mr. Shoebat, Mr. Richardson and the experts read, if any?" The invaders in the Gog and Magog battle are killed by a number of causes, not just by the sword. Ezekiel mentions the reasons the invaders from the North are destroyed: earthquake, mudslides and avalanches, mass confusion causing the soldiers to turn on each other, pestilence, torrential rain, hailstones, fire, and brimstone (Ezekiel 38:19-22). The enemy in Ezekiel 38-39 is partially destroyed by the sword, but the sword is the enemies' own sword used against one another, not Christ's sword.
   Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson state that experts claim the Antichrist is killed by the sword. Just exactly who are these experts, because they aren't very expert? In any case, the Antichrist, also known as the beast, is NOT killed by the sword, as he, along with the false prophet, is thrown alive into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:20). And if he is thrown ALIVE into the lake of fire, how can he be killed by the sword?
   Furthermore, earlier Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson wrote, as follows: "Another powerful reason to recognize the fact that Gog is Antichrist is because Ezekiel makes it clear that all prophets speak of Gog" (pg. 270). But Gog cannot be the Antichrist because Gog is killed on the mountains of Israel (Ezekiel 39:4) and is buried in the valley east of the sea (Ezekiel 39:11). And if the Antichrist is thrown alive into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:20) but Gog is killed on the mountains of Israel and buried in the valley east of the sea, how can Gog be the Antichrist? Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson forgot to give their readers an allegory to explain this dichotomy!
   To underscore their view about the inability of Westerners to correctly interpret the Scriptures, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson write things, such as, the following: "twist Ezekiel's words" (pg. 253), "highly irresponsible" (pg. 254), "irresponsible hermeneutics," (pg. 257), "This is a common problem with many of the modern Western analysts of prophecy" (pg. 262), "We need to address important misconceptions regarding the scope and geographical focus of Bible prophecy" (pg. 277), "western misconceptions," (pg. 275, 277), "Far too many in the West fail to remember the actual context of the Bible" (pg. 281), "Too many Westerners read the Bible narcissistically" (pg. 281, bold), "Many books have been written that revolve around the West and interpret history through a Western-centric lens" (pg. 281), "Far too many Westerners have missed the obvious fact that the Bible is thoroughly Middle Eastern" (pg. 281).
   And the list goes on and on. It is truly miraculous that Americans, or Westerners, have correctly learned anything from the Bible in the last two thousand years without the expert advice, learned biblical analyses, and key Mideastern allegories by Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson!
   By the way, narcissism means "excessive admiration of oneself." So, for the "far too many Westerners who read the Bible narcissistically," this would probably be the ones who only read the Bible so as to see a reflection of a Western interpretation in the Scriptures. This would include people like the Protestant Reformers, such as, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Philip Melanchthon, etc. It would also likely include current conservative biblical scholars like Dr. Robert Thomas, Thomas Ice, Dr. Randall Price, Dr. Merrill Unger, Dr. Charles Ryrie, Dr. John MacArthur, the late Dr. John Walvoord, and all other Westerners who disagree with Mr. Shoebat's interpretation of the Scriptures.
   Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson continue with their fiction, by writing, in part, that "the weapons are destroyed in both The Gog and Magog battle and in Armageddon," "I always hear the argument that the seven years of burning weapons must take place at the beginning of the seven-year Tribulation period because it takes 7 years to burn these weapons," and "it is wrong to call the seven-year false peace treaty offered by the Antichrist the "Seven-Year Tribulation." The Tribulation begins in the middle, when the Antichrist reneges on his deal. In reality, the tribulation is 3 ½ years" (pg. 273).
   First, where in the Bible does it state the weapons are destroyed after Armageddon? Nowhere! But even if John said the weapons are destroyed after Armageddon that does not prove the battle in Ezekiel 38-39 and the one in the Tribulation are one and the same.
   Second, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson don't tell readers who claimed, "the seven years of burning weapons must take place at the beginning of the seven-year Tribulation period." Just as a note, it is quite easy to show the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 cannot take place at any time during the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation.
   Third, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson say, "it is wrong to call the seven-year false peace treaty offered by the Antichrist the "Seven-Year Tribulation." The Tribulation begins in the middle, when the Antichrist reneges on his deal. In reality, the tribulation is 3 ½ years."
   Again, it is Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson who are wrong. It is not incorrect to call the seven-year false peace treaty offered by the Antichrist the "Seven-Year Tribulation." The primary "Tribulation" biblical passage cited by Jesus is in His Sermon on the Mount of Olives (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14).
   In a passage spoken by Daniel, he specifically indicated the initiation of the covenant with the Antichrist and the halting of the sacrifices, mark its beginning and midpoint, respectively (Daniel 9:27).
   The Tribulation, also known as Daniel's seventieth week, begins precisely when he, the Antichrist, enters into a covenant with "the many," or the Israelis, for one week, or seven years. And the midpoint of the Tribulation occurs when the Antichrist puts a stop to all Jewish sacrifices and grain offerings.
   Daniel's seventieth week lasts for seven years, and this entire seven-year period is known by other terms, such as, Day of Trouble or Distress (Zephaniah 1:15); Day of the Lord (Ezekiel 13:5, 30:3; Zechariah 14:1; Isaiah 13:6, 9); Time or Day of Distress or Trouble (Daniel 12:1, Zephaniah 1:15); Time of Jacob's Distress or Trouble (Jeremiah 30:7); Day of Vengeance (Isaiah 34:8, 35:4, 61:2, 63:4); etc.
   If one refers to the last half of the Tribulation as the Great Tribulation, then this period endures for three and one-half years, or forty-two months (Revelation 11:2). On the other hand, some say the Great Tribulation refers to only the final days of the last three and one-half years of the Tribulation. Also, the phrase, "a great tribulation," is mentioned only once in the New Testament (Matthew 24:20-21).
   Just the same, it is not wrong to call Daniel's seventieth week, the full seven years, as the Tribulation. And the Great Tribulation either begins in the middle of the Tribulation, after three and one-half years of the seven-year Tribulation have elapsed, or occurs in the last days of the seven-year Tribulation.
   Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson continue, as follows: "Such an event, of course--the burning of weapons for 7 years--would not take place unless Israel no longer needed weapons. Would it make sense to burn weapons at an hour of need? I could understand them burning weapons the first 3 ½ years, but why would they still burn the weapons after the middle of the 7 years? They will need all of the weapons they can get. This theory makes no sense. In fact, it further proves the case that Gog and Magog is indeed the final war. There is no longer a need for weapons. They will burn into the Millennium" (pg. 274).
   What makes no sense is the logic of Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson. After the battle described by Ezekiel in Ezekiel 38-39 takes place there is no doubt the Israelis will burn the weapons of the invaders for seven years (Ezekiel 39:9-10). However, the question is, "when" does the seven-year period of burning weapons occur? If the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 is the same as Armageddon, the Israelis must burn the weapons in the Millennium. But, is this possible? The answer is NO, as will be explained below.
   In addition, contrary to what Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson believe, there may be a very logical reason the Israelis would burn the weapons, other than because they don't need them any longer. Moreover, why would the Israelis possibly think wooden weapons might be of value in the end-times, in particular, after the middle of the seven-year Tribulation, as Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson suggest?
   The fact that the Israelis might burn the weapons only during the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation proves nothing, certainly not that Gog and Magog is indeed the final war. That logic is comical. Additionally, there is little to no biblical evidence the battle of Ezekiel 38-39 occurs at the end of the seven-year Tribulation, which would make it the final war, or the same as Armageddon. In fact, the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 may take place at any point in time, even tomorrow, as there are no other biblical prophecies that must be fulfilled before it could happen.
   But in order to make Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson's interpretation conform to specific Bible prophecies, they need to force Gog to be the Antichrist, and the battle of Ezekiel 38-39, to be the same as Armageddon.
   The first argument Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson use to claim the battle of Ezekiel 38-39 is the same as Armageddon is to say the weapons are destroyed after both battles. But where in Revelation does it state the weapons are destroyed after Armageddon? Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson don't provide this information. Nevertheless, they would likely cite these Scriptures: Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3; Joel 3:10.
   Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3, and Joel 3:10 do indicate implements of warfare will be changed into tools for agriculture. And these weapons mentioned in Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3, and Joel 3:10 are all made of metal, as one can only hammer metal weapons into plowshares. Also, the events described in all three of these verses definitely occur only in the Millennium, the thousand-year reign of Christ on earth after the seven-year Tribulation. However, the weapons used in Ezekiel 38-39 are wooden, as the Israelis spend seven years burning them. Therefore, because the weapons used in the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39, and in the battle described in the Tribulation, are so different this dictates the battles are not one and the same.
   For Armageddon and the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 to be the identical, the weapons used during Armageddon should be made of wood, and the burning of the weapons Ezekiel mentions in Ezekiel 39:9-10 must take place in the Millennium. Nevertheless, the verses in Isaiah, Micah, and Joel clearly show the weapons used at Armageddon are metal, not wood. And there are significant reasons to believe the weapons Ezekiel talks about must not only be burned prior to the Millennium, but also prior to the seven-year Tribulation. All things considered, therefore, the battle in Ezekiel appears to be completely different than Armageddon.
   Second, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson claim the Tribulation actually only begins at the midpoint of the seven-year long Tribulation. This point has already been explained.
   Third, to say the burning of weapons for seven years would not take place unless Israel no longer needed weapons is a false argument. Contrary to what Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson believe, there may be a completely valid reason the Israelis are burning WOODEN weapons, other than because they might not need them for "offensive" purposes. Moreover, if the Israelis needed the weapons for offensive purposes, one has to wonder how useful wooden weapons would be against modern weapons. In other words, do wooden weapons actually shoot wooden bullets? Even though Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson offer no explanation as to why the weapons mentioned in Ezekiel 38-39 are made of wood, there is a completely valid reason the invaders from the North will be carrying (wooden) weapons that burn, just as Ezekiel described.
   After making so many "sound" arguments, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson conclude, "This theory makes no sense. In fact, it further proves the case that Gog and Magog is indeed the final war. There is no longer a need for weapons. They will burn into the Millennium."
   The fact that Israel may perhaps need "wooden" weapons during the last half of the Tribulation proves nothing. Before Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson claim Israel will need all the weapons the country could get during the last three and one-half years of the Tribulation, they should give their readers a legitimate explanation for why the Israelis could possibly use "wooden" weapons during this time!
   Fourth, if the battle of Ezekiel 38-39 is Armageddon, as Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson contend, then they should provide a reasonable explanation as to how the Israelis could possibly burn weapons for seven years after this climactic war. Instead, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson simply write, "They (the wooden weapons) will burn into the Millennium."
   Although this explanation sounds reasonable and simplistic, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson have actually just dug a very deep hole. When Christ was crucified on the Cross, He not only died for all of man's sin, but His death also liberated Creation from Satan (Romans 8:20-22).
   And when Christ returns to earth at the end of the Tribulation, He will reclaim His Creation from its bondage to decay and make it as pristine as it was during the first days of Adam and Eve. Among other things, Zechariah claims during the Millennium there will be days without daytime or nighttime, and living water flowing out of Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:4-9).
   Furthermore, Isaiah pictures the righteous kingdom Jesus will establish in the Millennium: the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid, and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together, etc. (Isaiah 11:5-9).
   After the Tribulation, Christ re-takes His Creation from bondage. And when He does, all waters, from seawater to fresh water, as well as all lands, will be set free from nuclear and/or chemical hazardous wastes. In addition, all air will be cleaned of all poisonous gases. No forms of pollution of any kind will be found in air, earth, or water of the new Creation during the Millennium. With this being the case, does anyone actually believe "those who inhabit the cities of Israel will go out, and make fires with the weapons and burn them,.....and for seven years they will make fires of them. ..... for they will make fires with the weapons" (Ezekiel 39:9, 10, New American Standard Bible, Reference Edition, 1973, The Lockman Foundation)?
   For those who aren't real sure, the Israelis will NOT be burning weapons in the Millennium for seven years, or seven months, or seven days, or seven hours, or seven minutes, or even seven seconds and re-polluting Christ's pure and majestic Creation with sooty and smelly smoke.
   But Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson's problem with their idea the Israelis will be burning weapons for upwards of seven years in the Millennium does not end with the fact that such actions would re-pollute Christ's Creation. Although Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson do not bring it up in their book, but Ezekiel did not just mention those who inhabit the cities of Israel would make fires of the weapons for seven years. Ezekiel also wrote the house of Israel will bury Gog and his dead soldiers for seven months (Ezekiel 39:11-16).
   In the Millennium, there will only be Christ and His Bride, the redeemed Jews and Gentiles who personally accepted Him as their Messiah. But earlier, the members of Christ's Church had put on their fine linen, bright and clean, to attend the marriage supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:1-10).
   Besides redeeming Creation and providing salvation for all mankind, Christ's crucifixion on the Cross also swallowed up death in victory (1 Corinthians 15:50-57; see also Romans 6:23; Romans 8:2).
   Given that Christ's death and resurrection swallowed up death in victory, there will be no evidence of human death in the Millennium, certainly not by dead bodies piled up waiting to be buried. If Christ swallowed up death, then during Christ's Millennial reign human death will be forever a fact relegated to the distant past, never to return, not in any form.
   And now that Christ's Bride has put on imperishability and immortality, she will also never again be stained by the sight, smell, or touch of death, and certainly not by the death of a human in the Millennium. Just two verses from the Old Testament indicate how a dead body made one unclean (Numbers 5:2; Numbers 19:11). Because the touching of corpses makes one unclean, how could any member of Christ's Church, who has already put on his/her fine white linen, bury any dead body in the Millennium? He/she can't.
   Moreover, death is directly associated with sin: Romans 5:12; Romans 6:23; Romans 8:2; 1 Corinthians 15:56; James 1:15. Because sin and death are so intimately related (Romans 5:12, Romans 6:23, James 1:15), dead bodies in the Millennium would be the equivalent of sin co-existing with Christ in the Millennium. Therefore, on account Christ liberated Creation (Romans 8:20-22), then any evidence of sin, like dead bodies in the Millennium, would again subject Creation from bondage to decay.
   Also, since blood pollutes the land (Numbers 35:34), how could there be any sign of it, such as with dead bodies, in Christ's Millennial Kingdom? There can't be!
   Moreover, in the Millennium, the wolf dwells with the lamb, the leopard lies down with the kid, the calf and young lion live together, the cow and the bear graze together, and the lion eats straw like the ox (Isaiah 11:5-9). With this being the case, how could every kind of bird and every beast of the field assemble to eat the flesh of men and horses, as well as drink their blood (Ezekiel 39:17-20) in the Millennium? The prophet Isaiah indicates there are no birds and animals that feed on prey? In the Millennium, all carnivores will be turned into herbivores!
   In other words, if the Israelis burn the weapons for seven years in the Millennium, then they also have to bury the dead for seven months. And every kind of predatory bird and beast of the field (Ezekiel 39:4) must feed on the dead bodies in the Millennium for seven months. So how does one reconcile Ezekiel 39:4 with Isaiah 11:5-9 occurring in the Millennium? Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson forgot to provide Westerners with this allegory!
   These are just some of the problems Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson have with their interpretation that the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 is the same as the one at the end of Tribulation, and claiming the weapons can be burned in the Millennium for seven years and dead bodies can be buried for seven months. Also, even though they didn't mention the problem with burying bodies for seven months in the Millennium, one can now understand why! To use their own words, "This theory makes no sense" (pg. 273).
   The theory Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson propose that the Gog and Magog battle is indeed the final war, because Israel will no longer need weapons, and, therefore, burns them for seven years in the Millennium, is irreconcilable with Scripture! The problems of Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson's interpretation, however, don't end here. In fact, their entire book is irreconcilable with the Bible.
   To say "God's War on Terror, Islam, Prophecy and the Bible," Walid Shoebat, Top Executive Media, First Edition, 2008, is, for the most part, a disingenuous book would be stating the obvious and very gracious. The only people who would find this book, as anything more than heretical would be the biblically challenged, the biblically naive, the biblically asleep, or the biblically illiterate.
   And for those who posted a review of this book on Amazon and gave it five stars, they have obviously never biblically examined the statements in Mr. Shoebat's book to, "see whether these things were so." -- "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11. New American Standard Bible, Reference Edition, 1973, The Lockman Foundation).
   Moreover, the five-star reviewers obviously never even read any of Mr. Shoebat's references to determine whether they actually contained what Mr. Shoebat claimed they did. If they had, they would have found Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson often misrepresented the comments of the authors, left out opposing statements of the authors, and wrote some things the authors did not state in their articles, and/or books.
   Nevertheless, in terms of the comment, "Too many Westerners read the Bible narcissistically (pg. 281)," it is a fact every Christian, regardless of his/her culture has a set of attitudes that shape his/her interpretation of God's Word. And it is also a fact the writers of Scripture were Hebrews who lived in a Middle Eastern culture. It would be a terrible mistake to attempt to view any part of God's Word, be it a metaphor, a prophecy, a story, a parable, etc., through one's inherited culture, whether it is American, British, French, German, Mexican, Chinese, Muslim, former-Muslim, etc.
   Do Americans and Europeans interpret the Bible through a Western-centric lens? Yes. And do most former Muslims interpret the Bible through an Islamic-centric lens? Absolutely. The Scripture interpretations of Walid Shoebat are as far off the chart as those of most Americans. And although most Americans are completely unfamiliar with Old Testament and New Testament Hebrew culture, they are at least tethered to reality by using the grammatical-historical method of interpretation. Mr. Shoebat has no such tether as he relies on his Islamic fantasy allegories to interpret Scripture.
   There is no question the Middle Eastern culture is a far better lens through which one should strive to examine God's Word, as opposed to an American culture. But Mr. Shoebat fails to recognize he brings as much extra baggage, if not more, to interpreting the Scriptures than Americans. First, Mr. Shoebat is a former dyed-in-the wool Muslim, soaked with the teachings of Islam. Practically every page of his book drips with Islam theology, not with an understanding of Middle Eastern culture. Second, the New Testament was written in a Middle Eastern culture that is some two thousand years old. And parts of the Old Testament were written hundreds, and in some cases thousands of years, before the first century A.D. For Mr. Shoebat to simplistically assume the contemporary Middle Eastern/Muslim culture he grew up in is the same, as say, the fifth century B.C. Hebrew culture of Ezekiel, is false. Therefore, Mr. Shoebat's starting point for understanding Scripture is as flawed as an American's starting point.
   Walid Shoebat and Joel Richardson do not present a biblical interpretation of God's prophecies. Instead, they present Walid Shoebat's misguided interpretation of God's prophecies. Mr. Shoebat's book is so bad that a person could learn more about prophecy and the Bible by reading the Harry Potter books, the Da Vinci Code, or the Book of Mormon.
   Mr. Shoebat should take a hard long look in the mirror when he says, "Too many Westerners read the Bible narcissistically." For him to make that kind of statement is like the pot calling the kettle black. And if a person wants to find the definition of narcissism, he/she needs to only look at the person of Walid Shoebat, as revealed in his writings.
   Also, Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson tell their readers, "We must allow the Bible to speak its own language," but they continually impose their allegorical interpretations on the Scriptures to reduce the Word of God to near-fiction! The truth be told, the allegories of Walid Shoebat are as believable as a daily horoscope!
   Finally, because Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson seem to have most of the prophetic problems solved, here are a few issues they never addressed in their book:
   (1) What is the interpretation of Ezekiel 1:15-28 about the four spinning wheels?
   (2) Gog and his allies fall on the mountains of Israel. Where are the mountains of Israel? Where do they begin and end, and why?
   (3) Gog and his allies are buried in the valley east of the sea. Where is the valley east of the sea located, and why?
   (4) When do the Jewish people build the third Temple, and what events allow them to do so? Do they build the Temple before the seven-year Tribulation begins or during the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation? Please be specific.
   (5) Is Ezekiel 39:9-10 a "weak protest" of the northern nations invading Israel? If yes, why? If no, why not?
   (6) What is the reason the Israelis burn the weapons for seven years?
   In short, Mr. Shoebat suffers from a fatal case of world-view confusion. In lieu of viewing Islam through the Bible, Mr. Shoebat views the Bible through the prism of Islam. Mr. Shoebat's book is vacuous of biblically based Protestant prophecy interpretations. On the other hand, the book is filled with Walid Shoebat's personal eisogesis of Scripture. This book by Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Richardson has to be the worst edited book ever to be published. The editor, or editors, was asleep, unconscious, drunk, dead, or a space alien.



4. When Walid says that this book is an exhaustive look at Islam and bible prophecy he is not kidding. The book because some what boring as he tends to repeat him self. But I was not in any way disappointed with the book over all. If you are a student of the Book, then you will love this one!



5. Joel Richardson and Wallid Shoebat are to be credited for providing an erudite and thought provocking study
   on biblical end time events from a dispensational, and
   Middle Eastern view. Based upon Dan 11:39-45, I concur that the New Testament Antichrist will be coming out of the former Seleucid Empire of the Greeks. Today, this region is comprised of the modern day countries of Syria and Iraq. Therefore, he would have to be Islamic and Arabian.
   
   These writers also point out the obvious fact that all of the nations listed in the Old Testament prophets as attacking Israel in the End Times are currently Islamic. Ezkiel 38-39, and other passages in God's Word, attest to this. The Koran specifically states
   Israel is to be destroyed, and Christianity subjugated, prior to the end of their "Mahdi's" seven year rule.
   
   The main point of their study, which I would have to disagree with, is their premise that the Antichrist's
   kingdom will be localized only to the Middle East prior to Christ's second coming. Rev. 13:7-9 implies a world wide---not a local government. Since the problems of sin and lack of faith in Christ are universal, the plagues of the Book of Revelation have to apply to everyone! The Club of Rome, and the EU's plan to divide the world into ten separate unions of nations/zones, will undoubtably be their preferred method for accomplishing this.

3 comments about The Room and the Chair.

1. This new novel can't quite figure out what it wants to be. A roman a clef about the Washington Post, A spy thriller? A technospy novel? A war novel about women? A chronicle of sad people and their inability to love? Too many stories, most of them highly improbable, are set in motion in a slow, barely moving narrative, which winds it's way through incessant digressions, to a resolution without climax, or satisfaction.
   
   Some examples: A military airplane crashes in Washington DC and is covered up by a secret spy outfit for 18 months? Not after 9/11.
   
   A cub reporter finds out that the managing editor of the Post frequents pre-teen prostitutes, and doesn't tell? Not in this media world.
   
   An Iranian scientist escapes Iran, and then goes back because he is being followed? Why?
   
   The writing is overdone, elliptical, and without any real sparkle. The character digressions are incessant, but they don't really lead us to understanding, or to care. The plot moves so slowly that I had to keep going back to find out if I missed something. I didn't.



2. 'The Chair and The Room' is a knockout of a novel. It brings us places we have never heard of, into the familiar and then back to the recesses of the government's secret places. The novel opens our eyes to the unexplained and unexplored.
   
   Lorraine Adams tells us that in this novel "I'm looking at how human beings here in all their wonder and mystery and frailty stumble around a lot." And, does she ever! The book opens with a female pilot trying to eject from a failed fighter plane over Washington, DC. She lands in a tree and then disappears to surface later in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time the 'Washington Spectator' or as we know it, the 'Washington Post', explores their journalists and the stories surrounding the politics and life in this oh so political town. In Iran an engineer is in the middle of disappearing from his country. He is an 'informant' of a high mucky muck in one of the government's secret organizations. This leads directly to the Vice President's office, and someone who is not liked by many. How all of these stories intertwine is the magic of this novel. The stories of the night editor of the Spectator and the young woman he hopes to mentor. The nuclear engineer and the tragedy of his family. The female fighter pilot and her mentor and friend. The sergeant major who leads the secret organization. We get to know them, where they came from, how they think and all of the intricacies that make-up their personality and their lives. A sledding party that ends in tragedy, a hotel room that is a prison, a newspaper reporter who has a big story but where is it going? Some of the characters will seem familiar to you, and gives us a little insight into the news world. Lorraine Adams, the author, worked for the Washington Post, but that is all she will say about it. Her previous novel, 'Harbor' was one of the better books I read in 2005. The familarity of terrorists in both books gives me pause. She appears to have an inner source into the minds of terrorists, and a feel for how they work.
   
   Lorraine Adams has said that "The Room" is the newsroom, a place she knows well from working at the Washington Post for over a decade. "The Chair" is within the military intelligence community." These two organizations are forever in conflict. 'The Room' wants to know everything, all the secrets and and lies. 'The Chair' doesn't want anything known, no information, nothing passed to the outside world. The manner in which the two meet, is what sets this novel apart. It is a thrill to see behind the lines, to understand a little, how these worlds collide and how they work. The people in these worlds are so well written and drafted. We come to know them, and then..... The satisfaction of understanding the finality is not in this novel. We are left to wonder....
   
   
   Highly Recommended. prisrob 02-13-10
   
   
   Harbor
   
   Biography - Adams, Lorraine: An article from: Contemporary Authors Online



3. An interesting comment from a friend on Facebook sent me rushing to the bookstore. I'm a veteran of 32 years in the news business. This sounded like a fun read about how phony the news business can be and what puppets most reporters are these days. What a major, major disappointment. Adams' style, if you can call it a style, is to write in sentences that too often make no sense at all. I found myself having to read paragraphs two and three times in an effort to figure out what was being said. After struggling through a few dozen pages, I was tempted to trash the book. Instead, I decided to force myself to finish it just to see if I might be able to figure out how to interpret her cryptic writing. I never did. Even after reading the last several pages a few times, I still have no idea what was happening at the end of this bizarre attempt at storytelling. If you're thinking of buying this thing, don't. Contact me and I'll give you my copy.

5 comments about The Forever War (Vintage).

1. I bought this book wanting to get a deep look into an account of how the soldiers functioned in Iraq. An insight by a journalist should be a great place for that (I made that decision after reading Generation Kill).
   
   This isn't the book that accounts firefight after firefight followed by ambush. This book is much better than that. It gives a deep look into the Iraqi people. A look I was not expecting but riveted me so much that I could not put this book down, EVER!
   
   Dexter does a great job in drawing the reader in and not letting them go. This book is a must read!



2. This guy was in all of the worst places taliban controled Afghanistan, and the worst neighborhoods of Iraq over a number of years. The stories this guy tells are fascinating told in such detail. His experiences are probably without out parallel.
   
   The level of introspection into each war and country is the best for almost any westerner.
   
   This book is one of the best that Ive read on the subject.
   
   A pulitzer winner and well deserved in my opinion. Such a good book. I would thank the author if I could.



3. There are not enough good things to say about this book, which I read in Kindle form. This series of essays not only treats all its characters with sensitivity and compassion, but serves as an exceedingly good introduction to the entire political situation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
   
   Among the very best passages is a story of how a local meat merchant sets up shop at the edge of land mine fields, where he simply waits for goats and sheep to wander in and be blown to smithereens, thereby saving him much of the effort of butchery.
   
   Utterly compelling reading; not to be missed.



4. On Kindle. Now that I've been here in Afghanistan for the past 1 1/2 year and previous in Iraq in the 90s, Felkins recounts a collection of personal stories that elicit emotions disturbing. For those who deal daily with the people and do not live in the bubble of a green zone or embassy compound, I recommend this book for the specific reason of developing a story of your own. I recognize that I too encounter many of the same themes daily and wish to capture those in my mind and maybe on paper. How easy it is to feel trapped here and then travel back to the 'other world'...home.



5. Mr. Filkins offers a unique perspective of current two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This book is an excellent recollection of his experience working in the area before and during these two wars. I highly recommend this book.

5 comments about See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism.

1. See No Evil is by most accounts an excellent read. For anyone interested in the real world of intelligence and espionage it tells a riveting tale complete with close calls and the dangers of intelligence collection without glamorizing it to the point of a Flemming-esq satire. Of course the book's real value comes from the insight provided by Robert Baer and his twenty plus years working for the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence as an Operations Officer. His detailing of the CIA's gradual movement away from its origins with the OSS and towards a very politically correct intelligence agency in a dangerous world in important for anyone evaluating the current world climate. It also provides weighty insights into the lapses in the US intelligence community that lead to the eventual rise of international terrorism and the development of multinational terror networks, mostly from the perspective of a foot soldier evaluating the continually changing cultural and socio-political landscape of the Near East. In my mind though the greatest knowledge the book offered up were the subtle insights into the international intelligence community and the lesions able to be garnered from past short comings which may allow us to prevent history from repeating itself once more. It should be noted though that the book only details events prior to 9/11 and doesn't detail any number of changes which were said to occur in the US Intelligence community in the following seven years. If you're looking for a more high level review of that you may want to check out The CIA at War by Ronald Kessler. Defiantly a recommended read though for anyone who is curious what life is like for a spy in modern society.



2. See No Evil is a fascinating true view of 20 years of life in the CIA....including the frustration of how "political correctness" has changed the role of the CIA and how America is so vulnerable today. A really eye-opening and thought provoking book....I am so glad I read it!



3. I'm surprised at the large number of favorable reviews. I was very excited to read this book from the description but ended up disappointed. It started out great - describing what it was like to join the CIA and the training etc. Then it begins to get dense with names and details and the bigger picture gets obscured.
   
   There is a whole lot of complaining in the book and when I read a book like this I must always remember that hindsight is 20/20. It is very easy to criticize decisions in the past when the outcomes have already been determined. Nonetheless, the author does present some valid overarching criticisms of the CIA and I'm sure the CIA would do well to heed them.
   
   The author does not give a lot of historical context to his situations and I think that hurts the quality of this work.
   Unless you are a die-hard CIA enthusiast, you may want to pass on this one. There are other better books that expose the CIA.



4. Baer is a skilled historian, having actually been a part of the recent history of the CIA. His account of the American politics with the Middle East is enlightening to say the least.
   
   Politics and intelligence is all too often politicized for unnecessary agendas, but Baer seems to be able to disassociate from the potential for pointing fingers and accusing a political group for the failure of CIA operations. Instead, the failure is one of bureaucratic leaders, afraid to take a risk for intelligence.
   
   The author takes the reader through a journey from his days of uncertainty as a grad student, the highly secretive spy training, and his own journey in finding Iran at the root of all evil. While the book focuses on his entirety in the CIA and takes the reader through the timeline of events, Baer is quick to reference how each event built upon the previous and the evidence continued to lead back to Iran.
   
   No doubt this book's popularity and poignant nature spawned his following book, "The Devil We Know."



5. See No Evil is many books in one. It's a biography, telling a very interesting story about how life's twists and turns shaped a young man such that he was identified by the CIA as good agent material. Baer's unusual upbringing had the advantage of giving him the ability to operate in any country independently and keep his wits about himself. This is also a history book, weaving a tale of many events with which Baer played a role as an intelligence gatherer. The events have to do mainly with violence in the Middle East and the constant power struggle there. Last, See No Evil is a general book about intelligence and the CIA, complete with information that should be helpful to reform the Agency.
   
   The most important aspect of this book is the picture it shows of the Central Intelligence Agency and its role in government. We all know from the newspapers that human intelligence was underutilized and not trusted compared to high-tech signal and satellite intelligence, and the U.S. government now recognizes this and plans to correct the problem. Beyond that, however, are the underlying problems that make human intelligence a chronic problem for government. There will continue to be a lack of human intelligence, which takes many years to build up, and because the political system does not readily allow human intelligence to thrive.
   
   Baer shows how many of the important people at the CIA, the remaining and flourishing "old-boy-network," enhance careers by avoiding risk. Some create paperwork making it appear as if they're busy while cooperatively censoring intelligence politicians would find inconvenient. Others are true professionals and risk their lives doing what they were hired to do. The true professionals, in doing their job, jeopardize their careers by definition. For example, a case officer operating in a foreign and hostile environment would naturally have to associate with foreign nationals. In doing so, the case officer is exposed to investigations related to any number of charges, such as providing secret information to a foreign intelligence agent. The mere act of a case officer doing his or her job is professionally risky. Human intelligence work, when done properly, is not necessarily good for one's career.
   
   Baer reaches out through his books to get public support for the stated mission of the CIA. Politicians of either party probably will never voluntarily allow the Agency to do its job appropriately due to inherent conflicts of interests. Namely, top politicians need intelligence that suits their political purposes, whether to award contracts to donor corporations or conduct a political career-enhancing foreign policy. But facts are supposed to be neutral and intelligence personnel are charged with getting to the truth whatever it is. Therefore the CIA probably benefits by having advocates such as Baer to inform the public about the need for non-politicized intelligence.
   
   After listening to the audio version of See No Evil twice, ably read by the author, I feel a bit pessimistic about quick reform of the intelligence community. I don't know how the intelligence community can avoid being politicized. Career rewards for shaping intelligence to fit policy are too great a temptation for the all the CIA's upper echelon to avoid, I think. However, this may be a common problem for all governments. The matter then becomes one of relativity. How politicized is our intelligence community compared to others? See No Evil does not address that question but hopefully Baer will produce another good book that does.

5 comments about Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001.

1. This book is big, but it's worth it. By covering such a wide range of time, people and countries the author is able to tie together so much information to give you a full picture of how past actions led to today's current situation.



2. Ghost Wars is a good book. I recommend it for anyone who is interested in the CIA.



3. After 171 reviews, there's not much I can add to what's already been said, but I enjoyed this book so much that I did want to share a few comments. First of all, the style of writing is very engaging - sort of like reading one of Tom Clancy's early novels. Second of all, I did not detect any bias (something I'm always senstivie to when I read history). Third of all, Mr. Coll does an excellent job of helping the reader to keep track of the large cast of characters. So, if you enjoy reading spy thriller novels (like those written by Frederick Forsyth), you might enjoy reading about the REAL THING from an author who can write history that is a real page-turner. Good stuff!



4. I have to consider this book a CIA whitewash. The author, who was an editor at the Washington Post, which more or less tells me he's a system controlled propagandist, got access to "classified documents" and interviews with CIA agents that were on the ground in Afghanistan to the high level guys. He just takes peoples, who should be some of the last on the planet you should trust, word for it. He passes the buck, glosses over or ignores the key facts about Afghanistan going back to the Carter administration. Sorry but I have a much more conspiratorial view of what went on with the Mujhaden, the Taliban and Bin Laden/CIAlqueda than what is presented in this book. I just don't trust this book. The upside of Ghost Wars is it is well written and interesting, almost reading like a novel at times. Also even though this is a whitewash some of what makes it into this book would shock the average American who gets their info from controlled news sound bites so its not completely useless as long as you know your not getting the full story when you read this.



5. While it is a long and complex exploration of the subject, this book is the gold standard by which other books about US involvement in Afghanistan may be measured.

2 comments about The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror.

1. Reading a book like this tells a story that us "normal" people don't get to hear about too often. All the focus on this book has been about waterboarding and such, but it really is about life in the CIA and putting one's focus and energy on serving your country and saving lives. Mr. Kiriakou has seen a storm of publicity around his public discussions of what is or is not torture, but the fact remains is that he put his own life on the line for the sake of all of us, as do so many others in our military and agencies such as the CIA. This book gives a personal perspective into what it is like for those who seek to serve others.



2. When I heard that John was going to an interview with ABC in 2007 my deceit antenna should have went up. Why would a first-class case officer be talking about his involvement in the Abu Zubayduh capture and other activities? The mystery was solved when John pawned himself to the hand wringing crowd who says that water boarding is torture. Or maybe he is a plant by the CIA and George W. Bush or Dick Cheney?
   John's status as a good case officer does not qualify him or any of the rest of us to state legal opinion on the matter. He also lied when he said he was at the interrogation of Zubayduh and how he "cracked" in thirty-plus seconds. And yes, his comment was a lie and not a problem on the part of the public's collective hearing.
   I have read all but 30 or so pages of John's book and for the most part it is accurate. So to all who want say I have not read the book please don't waste your time. I have been water boarded while in the military and also while training in other interrogation techniques. Did it feel good like sitting on the beach watching the day go by? No. Do you feel like you are going to die? No. The only way you can compare this to the feeling of dying is if you have been to the point of dying. It is uncomfortable and yes it is miserable. That is why they use it.
   It is a sorry day when CIA officers need to clear their "Oprah Book Club" conscience by airing it in public. The CIA has many dedicated officers who have done so much more than John would or could who sleep well knowing they did what they had to do to defend this great country. Still a good read.